Jackson: Booker, Paul find themselves political friends with benefits

By HERB JACKSON

Record Columnist |

The Record

Rarely have junior senators received as much attention for obscure legislation as Sens. Cory Booker and Rand Paul did last week when they introduced a bill to make it easier to seal non-violent criminal records, especially of juvenile drug arrests.

AP FILE PHOTOS

U.S. Sens. Cory Booker, left, Rand Paul

Booker, D-N.J., and Paul, R-Ky., were already political celebrities, but their collaboration drew numerous features about the Capitol’s new odd couple in national news outlets, and a standing-room crowd at the Newseum for a joint discussion and cocktail party hosted by Politico.

The serious talk about the inequities and economic waste from the War on Drugs and the need to give ex-offenders a chance to succeed in the job market was mixed with light moments: Booker shared his musical taste for show tunes, especially Anne Hathaway’s singing in “Les Miserables,” and Paul complained he did not get a cocktail and suggested the two senators might do a reality TV show together.

The pairing brought attention to the problems faced by ex-offenders who have gone straight, and bipartisan sponsorship gives the bill a somewhat better chance of advancing than one pushed by a single senator or a group from the same party.

It also provides attention and political benefits to the senators.

Dissatisfaction with gridlock and partisan gamesmanship is one of the reasons Congress gets low approval ratings, so the appearance of an arch-liberal friend of President Obama working with the Republican whose leadership of the libertarian wing of the party makes him a presidential contender in 2016 could convince some voters that these two, at least, are trying to get something done.

Booker must persuade voters to reelect him in November after being sworn in last year on Oct. 31 to serve the remainder of the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s term. Politicians seeking reelection usually have to have something to show for being on the job, so a high-profile effort could help even if it does not immediately succeed.

Booker argues that while the United States is home to less than 5 percent of the world’s population, it accounts for 25 percent of its prisoners, and parts of the system contribute to ex-offenders continuing to break the law.

Among them, he says, are rules that make ex-offenders ineligible for welfare and food-assistance programs when they need it most, and the difficulty erasing the stigma of a conviction that can make finding a job even harder.

“We cannot afford to sap billions of dollars into a broken system that is locking people up and then doing nothing to empower them to succeed,” Booker said on the Senate floor Thursday. “We are wasting human potential, human productivity, we’re hurting our economy, and by trapping people without options, we often end up making our communities less safe.”

Paul potentially benefits even more. He is often seen working with a handful of Senate hard-liners against things even many fellow Republicans support, so finding a Democratic ally for one of his initiatives could make him look less obstructionist.

And having that ally be the Senate’s only African-American Democrat could help him address a major liability he faced in his last campaign, when he was attacked for saying he would have opposed the Civil Rights Act. Paul has emphasized the racial disparity in drug punishment, even though the bill to expunge arrest and conviction records does not directly address it.

“In fact, 80 percent of the public is white, and so how do we get to three out of four people in prison are black or brown?” Paul said on CNN last week. “There really is a racial outcome to the War on Drugs and we need to reevaluate it from top to bottom.”

The bill still faces an uphill climb, especially since the freshman senators will have to persuade a more seniority-focused chamber to put their issue ahead of others. It also has some political liability, because the public’s priority list likely does not include having Congress spend its time on the problems faced by people who have committed crimes when many others are suffering during the weak recession.

Bell said employers deserved to know the history of a job seeker, and the seeker should be able to explain it. He argued that monetary policies were more to blame for economic problems than drug laws.

“Congress should focus on fixing the Fed rather than giving food stamps to drug offenders,” Bell said. Booker’s campaign responded by saying Bell was, in effect, criticizing members of his own party, namely Paul.

Certainly, Booker and Paul are an odd pairing. Booker revels in treating his 1.5 million Twitter followers as close friends, even famously inviting people to use his Newark apartment when he had power and others didn’t after Superstorm Sandy.

Paul’s intense focus on privacy rights not only included crusading against the National Security Agency’s surveillance, he began using the online platform SnapChat, he told the Politico audience, because its default setting removes postings after they are read, so no record exists.

Despite their differences, both are trying to be seen as senators with fresh eyes to look at how Washington works and question what doesn’t.

Their bill aims at a small part of the billions spent administering justice, with provisions to automatically expunge some juvenile records and create a process adults could use that, eventually, would let them legally tell a prospective employer they had no prior offenses. Congress can change only federal law, but Booker and Paul want to prod states to change their laws by making state expungement rules a factor in awarding federal grants for local police patrols.

New Jersey already meets some of the bill’s standards, and Booker’s office said that where it doesn’t, it is in a similar position as many other states. That means, in effect, the Garden State should not face a disadvantage in getting future grants.

The question remains whether Booker and Paul can deliver.

Can Paul persuade fellow Republicans to support a bill that makes it easier for ex-convicts to get welfare and food stamps? Will Booker get Senate Democrats, several of whom are facing tough reelection campaigns that will determine what party controls the chamber next year, to open themselves to a charge of being weak on crime?

It’s unfair to expect the two freshmen to deliver immediately. But time will show if this effort amounts to more than political posturing.

Jackson: Booker, Paul find themselves political friends with benefits

Rarely have junior senators received as much attention for obscure legislation as Sens. Cory Booker and Rand Paul did last week when they introduced a bill to make it easier to seal non-violent criminal records, especially of juvenile drug arrests.

Booker, D-N.J., and Paul, R-Ky., were already political celebrities, but their collaboration drew numerous features about the Capitol’s new odd couple in national news outlets, and a standing-room crowd at the Newseum for a joint discussion and cocktail party hosted by Politico.

The serious talk about the inequities and economic waste from the War on Drugs and the need to give ex-offenders a chance to succeed in the job market was mixed with light moments: Booker shared his musical taste for show tunes, especially Anne Hathaway’s singing in “Les Miserables,” and Paul complained he did not get a cocktail and suggested the two senators might do a reality TV show together.

The pairing brought attention to the problems faced by ex-offenders who have gone straight, and bipartisan sponsorship gives the bill a somewhat better chance of advancing than one pushed by a single senator or a group from the same party.

It also provides attention and political benefits to the senators.

Dissatisfaction with gridlock and partisan gamesmanship is one of the reasons Congress gets low approval ratings, so the appearance of an arch-liberal friend of President Obama working with the Republican whose leadership of the libertarian wing of the party makes him a presidential contender in 2016 could convince some voters that these two, at least, are trying to get something done.

Booker must persuade voters to reelect him in November after being sworn in last year on Oct. 31 to serve the remainder of the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s term. Politicians seeking reelection usually have to have something to show for being on the job, so a high-profile effort could help even if it does not immediately succeed.

Booker argues that while the United States is home to less than 5 percent of the world’s population, it accounts for 25 percent of its prisoners, and parts of the system contribute to ex-offenders continuing to break the law.

Among them, he says, are rules that make ex-offenders ineligible for welfare and food-assistance programs when they need it most, and the difficulty erasing the stigma of a conviction that can make finding a job even harder.

“We cannot afford to sap billions of dollars into a broken system that is locking people up and then doing nothing to empower them to succeed,” Booker said on the Senate floor Thursday. “We are wasting human potential, human productivity, we’re hurting our economy, and by trapping people without options, we often end up making our communities less safe.”

Paul potentially benefits even more. He is often seen working with a handful of Senate hard-liners against things even many fellow Republicans support, so finding a Democratic ally for one of his initiatives could make him look less obstructionist.

And having that ally be the Senate’s only African-American Democrat could help him address a major liability he faced in his last campaign, when he was attacked for saying he would have opposed the Civil Rights Act. Paul has emphasized the racial disparity in drug punishment, even though the bill to expunge arrest and conviction records does not directly address it.

“In fact, 80 percent of the public is white, and so how do we get to three out of four people in prison are black or brown?” Paul said on CNN last week. “There really is a racial outcome to the War on Drugs and we need to reevaluate it from top to bottom.”

The bill still faces an uphill climb, especially since the freshman senators will have to persuade a more seniority-focused chamber to put their issue ahead of others. It also has some political liability, because the public’s priority list likely does not include having Congress spend its time on the problems faced by people who have committed crimes when many others are suffering during the weak recession.

Bell said employers deserved to know the history of a job seeker, and the seeker should be able to explain it. He argued that monetary policies were more to blame for economic problems than drug laws.

“Congress should focus on fixing the Fed rather than giving food stamps to drug offenders,” Bell said. Booker’s campaign responded by saying Bell was, in effect, criticizing members of his own party, namely Paul.

Certainly, Booker and Paul are an odd pairing. Booker revels in treating his 1.5 million Twitter followers as close friends, even famously inviting people to use his Newark apartment when he had power and others didn’t after Superstorm Sandy.

Paul’s intense focus on privacy rights not only included crusading against the National Security Agency’s surveillance, he began using the online platform SnapChat, he told the Politico audience, because its default setting removes postings after they are read, so no record exists.

Despite their differences, both are trying to be seen as senators with fresh eyes to look at how Washington works and question what doesn’t.

Their bill aims at a small part of the billions spent administering justice, with provisions to automatically expunge some juvenile records and create a process adults could use that, eventually, would let them legally tell a prospective employer they had no prior offenses. Congress can change only federal law, but Booker and Paul want to prod states to change their laws by making state expungement rules a factor in awarding federal grants for local police patrols.

New Jersey already meets some of the bill’s standards, and Booker’s office said that where it doesn’t, it is in a similar position as many other states. That means, in effect, the Garden State should not face a disadvantage in getting future grants.

The question remains whether Booker and Paul can deliver.

Can Paul persuade fellow Republicans to support a bill that makes it easier for ex-convicts to get welfare and food stamps? Will Booker get Senate Democrats, several of whom are facing tough reelection campaigns that will determine what party controls the chamber next year, to open themselves to a charge of being weak on crime?

It’s unfair to expect the two freshmen to deliver immediately. But time will show if this effort amounts to more than political posturing.